NIRDOSH KUMAR AND 19 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS
WRIC/36759/2025 · 2025-10-28
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 192137 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 192137 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 36759 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J.
HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.
1. Heard Shri Prem Kumar Chaurasia, learned counsel for the petitioners; Shri Devesh Vikram, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State respondent nos.1 to 5 and Shri A.B. Singhal, learned counsel for Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority.
2. The instant writ petition is preferred for direction commanding the respondents to accord valuation of houses and cattle shade etc. over Gata No.541SA situated at Village Kuraib, Tehsil Jewar, District Gautam Budh Nagar on the basis of valuation report from April, 2023 to June, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on the instructions, makes a statement at the bar that the petitioners have not accepted the award. They have already moved a detailed representation to the District Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar (respondent no.2) under Section 64 of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in short "the Act, 2013") on 22.05.2023, followed by reminder dated 04.04.2024 but till date, the matter is not referred to the authority concerned. He has confined his prayer only to the relief that the petitioners' representation dated 22.05.2023/04.04.2024 may be considered by the Competent Authority.
4. Shri Devesh Vikram, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel and Shri A.B. Singhal, learned counsel for respondent no.5 fairly state that in case the application is strictly in accordance with law, within time, then definitely the authority shall take a final call in the matter in accordance with law. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Prem Kumar Chaurasia Counsel for Respondent(s) : Aditya Bhushan Singhal, C.S.C. Nirdosh Kumar and 19 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s)
5. No useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending.
6. Considering the factual aspect of the matter and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue, this writ petition is disposed of finally with observation that in case the application is admissible in law, the Competent Authority may take recourse as available under Section 64 of the Act, 2013 in accordance with law. October 29, 2025 RKP WRIC No. 36759 of 2025 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad